[HATS] Re: Ilink on the 146.60 repeater.

[WalterH]

FYI...
Let's NOT make the assumption that using a repeater system over the Internet
is any LESS secure than one over the air, for keeping non-licensed operators
off the repeaters. Or that it can't be controlled properly.
The Ilink system is plenty secure, as there are several firewall ports that
have to be opened, just to allow the connection in the first place, which
limits it's exposure from some of the normal hack attempts. While it's true,
that anyone could make up a callsign, install Ilink, and go right out over
the air, this is very much like someone grabbing a stolen radio, or even a
legitimately purchased radio, make up a callsign, and go right out over the
air.
The big difference here on security is, that when the non-licensed person
does this over the radio link, there is no way of knowing who did it, and
where they are from. Until they do it long enough for someone to break out
the DF systems and start tracking them down. All of this takes a bit of
time. Some groups are clearly better prepared for this than others, but this
not the norm.
At least with the Internet based systems, there is an IP address associated
with the connection that you can extract. (Not built into the Ilink software
unfortunately, like many other Internet to Radio software systems) And while
the ISP's will not give you any details about who this address was being
used by without a court order, they are typically pretty responsive to
contacting the user to inform them of illegal in improper use that they may
be doing, even when reported by another user. And if the FCC has a need to
get this information as well, it will definitely happen.
Or, you can BLOCK this address (using other techniques not in the Ilink
software, which might be tricky given the DHCP address assignments by ISP's
today), or lockout the callsign being used, as a part of the Ilink software.
Assuming that someone suspects they are hearing someone using an illegal
callsign.  How many people break out the callbook or QRZ on a voice repeater
to validate every person they talk to ?   I'm not saying we shouldn't care
about it, just that most of as hams are plenty sensitive to this, and can
usually detect this type of activity pretty quick.
As far as control, the Ilink boards being used to link to repeaters, have a
second audio port on them (the new boards that is), to allow for over-riding
the link, even if it's actively transmitting. And there is a simple way to
disconnect the user. Or even shut the Ilink system down remotely.
The IRLP system is a really nice system indeed, however there are a couple
limitations that must be adhered to, such as preventing CW ID's down the
links, as well as preventing repeater courtesy tones from doing the same.
Chris brings up some very valid concerns over control of the link systems,
that applies to ANY link or repeater system, and the repeater owners that
ANY system links into certainly bears some responsibility here as well. We
as repeater trustees must allow, or not allow things on our repeaters, that
WE agree with. After all, it's OUR callsign on the line as well. Regardless
of who is initiating the violation.
I think anyone can agree that deals with the IT technology today, that you
would be hard pressed to find more stable systems than the Unix based type
systems including Linux, but nothing can replace the Windows user install
base. As long as every system sold off the shelf comes with it. And the
average home user definitely would not be able to bring up a Linux machine
and expect to have all of their Windows software operate properly (some
would argue that even Windows has this problem :)), not to mention what the
vendor support line will tell you when you call for assistance, because you
just installed Linux on your machine. (which is clearly a fault of the
computer manufacturers in my personal opinion)
But I guess that's why we call these hobbies. And we as hams are blessed
with multiple choices, to pick what works for our own operating environment.
And to add to Chris's point about remote control, just because it's easy to
install, we all need to live within the guidelines and regulations given by
the FCC.
Let's not lose sight of what has made this hobby so great. !
Just my 2 cent's worth...
Walter/K5WH


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	cboone@earthlink.net [mailto:cboone@EARTHLINK.NET]
Sent:	Friday, February 15, 2002 7:08 AM
To:	hats@stevens.com
Subject:	[HATS] Re: Ilink on the 146.60 repeater.

One big problem is Ilink has security loopholes in it and can allow
ANYONE with a PC and a fake callsign to get on a radio connected node..
This is NOT what the FCC wants and certainly is outside the limits of
station control, etc as defined in all of Part 97...

ANYONE could go and install ILink on a PC, put in a fake call ..say like
Riley's???, get up on a Ilink system and cause all sorts of problems...

The 29.6 10m FM rmt someone has on the Net is ridiculous...for one thing,
WHO is monitoring it??? (Part 97 rules require a control op to be in
CONTROL and MONITOR such a station at ALL times it is in use...)

IRLP on the other hand is radio to radio only..it does not allow
KB links into the system and is much more secure....it is truely an
amateur RADIO to RADIO only link......PLUS it runs on LINUX (how many times
does it crash compared to Windoze??? :)

Since it is a "wireline link" to other amateur RADIO systems (usually
rptrs!), there is less of a control op issue...(remote base vs rptrs are
different)

ILink in a private system to system connection with NO outside connections
would be fine for those wanting to use it....In fact I will be using IRLP
or Ilink to connect some of the TRS rptrs together this year.

Chris
WB5ITT
444.5 Beaumont
444.8 Conroe
444.3 Houston (changing to 100Hz PL this weekend)

BTW dont forget the Orange Hamfest a week from Saturday...talk in on 147.18
and 444.5

Fred Juch wrote:

> Have any of you Houston guys read the info in QST about the I-Link radio
> interface system? You install it in a PC on a cable modem or some such
> Internet connection and it will allow you to link a couple of repeaters
> over the Internet. Since I have a PC here running Internet mail services,
I
> thought I would add one here in Round Rock, TX. My radio side will
probably
> be 1.2 GHz for starters. I ordered my board today, and will probably have
> it running in only a year or two as my schedule works. But it is something
> to think about. Another option might be to get all the clubs with ATV
> repeaters to set up links tied to their repeaters some how. Maybe with
> video snippets (Webcam32.com) on the Internet.
>
> Just a thought,
> Fred Juch, N5JXO

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .

---
Send e-mail to 'listar@stevens.com' with subject:

  'unsubscribe hats'  to unsubscribe from this list
  'subscribe hats'    to subscribe from this list
  'help'              for more information

Send e-mail to 'dave@stevens.com' to contact a list administrator


---
Send e-mail to 'listar@stevens.com' with subject:

  'unsubscribe hats'  to unsubscribe from this list
  'subscribe hats'    to subscribe from this list
  'help'              for more information

Send e-mail to 'dave@stevens.com' to contact a list administrator